Patna High CourtCR. MISC./12302/2024bail granted

Mohan Lal Dangi @ Mohan Lal v. The State Of Bihar

2024-02-29Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12302 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-211 Year-2023 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Mohan Lal Dangi @ Mohan Lal S/O Nathu Lal Dangi R/O Village- Bhesra Khurd, P.S- Bhensda, Distt.- Udaipur, Rajasthan. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sumit Shekhar Pandey, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ramesh Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 211 of 2023 dated 04.06.2023 for the offences punishable u/ss 272, 273, 420, 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 30(a), 32, 36, 41(i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 7930 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the truck.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioner has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12302 of 2024(2) dt.29-02-2024 2/3 transpired in this case only on the basis of the fact that the petitioner happens to be the owner of the truck but the same was not being driven by the petitioner at the time of the alleged recovery. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, hence no case is made out. Learned Counsel has relied on the judgment of Full Bench of Hon'ble Patna High Court in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in 2019 (2) PLJR 1089. The Full Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra) has held that an application for anticipatory bail in a case arising out of Bihar Excise and Prohibition Act can be maintained, despite the bar under Section 76 (2) of the Act, if on the basis of allegation made in the FIR, no offence under the said provision is made out.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner by submitting that the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act applies in this case.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of allegation against the petitioner, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12302 of 2024(2) dt.29-02-2024 3/3 arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Muzaffarpur in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 211 of 2023, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U T